One day I will get round to doing a podcast episode on the British film Studio, Amicus. They were the small studio that competed with Hammer, but are often forgotten when talking about the history of Horror Cinema. While Hammer focused on the Gothic horror with established characters Dracula, Frankenstein and the wolf man, Amicus tried something different. They entered the market with a series of Anthology or Portmanteau movies. Asylum, released in 1972, is my favourite of Amicus anthology horrors.

The story centres around a young doctor (Robert Powell) attending an interview at a secluded Asylum. As part of the interview he is challenged by the interviewing Doctor (Patrick Magee) to identify the former lead doctor of the facility, Doctor Byron, from the patients, as he lost his mind and is now incarcerated. He visits three patients and they recount the reason they are there, each one a story in the anthology.

As is the case with all anthologies, the stories vary in quality. While I enjoy them all I’m appreciate that elements of them haven’t aged particularly well. While macabre the opening story “frozen fear” hinges on the viewer accepting a concept that can be perceived as creepy or ridiculous. It’s a fast paced opener but not the strongest. The following two stories are much stronger and play out today just as well as they would have done in 1972. “Weird Taylor” has the excellent Peter Cushing in and is wonderfully atmospheric with a suitably weird end. The third of the three is less supernatural, the story of a young woman and her disturbed ‘best friend’. While the ending is predictable today it still has a great punch.

The final part of the film that really makes this a winner for me is that inclusion of the wrap around segments becoming part of the horror. The cast throughout take the horror seriously and are fantastic. I’m invested in each of the stories and the solid performances help me get passed the slightly sillier story points and special effects that haven’t aged well.

In addition to this, the film looks great. The Blu ray upgrade is crisp without loosing the 70s graininess. The colour and details pop, giving the film new life. Asylum is never going to get a 4K scan so this is the best it’s going to look, and it’s excellent.

It’s a great film and a fantastic example of the best of Amicus and British Horror of the 70s.

Special features:

The special features provide an interesting glimpse of the making of the film, and the history of Amicus.

On the disc there’s a new informative commentary from the director, camera operator and film historian Marcus Hearn. As well as several other new featurettes focusing on the films production and wider place in Amicus history. The two that stand out are ‘inside the fear factory’ a collection of interviews from those involved in the history of Amicus. These are accompanied by a featurettes from the 70s on set. This gives an interesting insight into the film and how films were presented in the early 70s.

In addition to these the Blu Ray comes with a 36 page booklet, containing stills from the movies as well as a selection of promotional posters. However, the primary content is three essays.

“Nothing to loose but your mind” a chronicling the final years of Amicus studios (a essay about the earliest years of the studio comes with second sights other recent Amicus release, The House that dripped blood). “Robert Bloch and Asylum” how the writer came to write the film and his relationship with Amicus studios. “Amicus productions and the rise of portmanteau in horror Cinema”, the title pretty much says it all.

The insight and information from the disc and booklet content round this release out. It’s an excellent presentation of the film with details and discussion on the film and its place in Amicus history.

Packaging:

I’m a sucker for a special edition and this is a beautiful edition. The slipcase is well made and the new art is beautiful. It captures the tone and madness of the film and the likenesses are spot on. It’s made better by the fact that the edition comes with a two sided poster including the new art the original poster art. This is also replicated on the reversible cover.

Overall it’s an Awesome edition of one of my favourite 70s British Horror movies. Second Sight have nailed it once again.

I recently had the pleasure of being invited to the Madame Tussauds Blackpool Marvel Experience opening night. It was a fun evening and I left feeling impressed with the quality of the experience and all the exhibits.

Being a podcast about 20th Century Pop Culture this kind of thing is perfect for me. I got to get a photo with Sid Rotten, Freddie Mercury and the Two Ronnie’s. I was a happy little nerd to begin with. So to top it off with the main reason I was there was awesome.

The exhibit is split into four areas each focused on different parts of the comic experience. The first is a faux comic book shop displaying a wide array of modern Marvel comics, many of which I have read. However the thought struck me that this was a missed opportunity. The racks could have been used to demonstrate the evolution of the Marvel universe from its Birth in the early 60’s to the Modern Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), which the exhibits focus on. Although this may be filled differently when open to the public.

Moving past this you enter the second zone with a smouldering Hemsworth Thor. The statue is excellent, not only is the face spot on the Thor Avengers movie costume is perfect. Set up like an ice cave you also get to see if you are worthy by trying to lift the Asgardian war hammer Mjolnir.

Beyond this is zone 3, an open area with several excellent Marvel Heroes and photo opportunities. The goliath Hulk looks incredible (see what I did there!). He is accompanied by the meanest mother fu… er, greatest spy master Sam Jackson’s Nick Fury and your friendly waxwork Spider-man.

In my opinion, the best is saved for last where you will have the chance to have a picture with a full size Groot. It looks stunning and who doesn’t want to join the Guardians of the Galaxy.

It’s not the largest exhibit but it is an excellent celebration on the modern Marvel Universe. All the displays are great with (mostly) life like statues and loads of interactive elements. They are a slice of British pop culture heritage and to have this joined by some of the most iconic characters in modern pop culture is wonderful.

I congratulate the team that worked on this for capturing the essence of wonder and imagination that Marvel and the MCU inspires. It’s a well worth a visit for anyone holidaying in Blackpool.

When you’re a kid you are taught basic black and white rules of morality. Don’t steal, don’t lie and of course don’t kill. As you get older you start to understand that there are moral grey areas. Situations when these steadfast rules of right and wrong are called into question. When certain wrongs could be right. This can start an interesting debate about how best to react to a situation. What is the best moral stance?

Action movies often (if not always) throw these ethics out the window and hope that you, as viewer, are happy to just go along with the ride. You are given a protagonist who is thrown into a situation and must fight for their life or save someone. Simple.

Ok so let’s talk Die Hard. John McClane is trapped in a building with armed men, willing to kill to get what they want. They put him and others under threat. Throughout the film McClane responds with deadly force. In this situation we can accept that killing is inevitable and in this case acceptable, as it is his only way of survival.

In both Rambo First Blood (1982) and Terminator 2 (1991) we get a direct response to the need to kill. In First Blood Rambo uses brutal but non-lethal methods to take down the police. Rambo is highly skilled and able to use those skills to prevent the killing and lets the Sheriff know that it could have been different. This is a change from the book and makes Rambo a smarter and more dangerous character. The holding back displays a humanity that I think is missing from some actions heroes.

In Terminator 2 it is established that the T800 has detailed files on human anatomy to make it a more efficient killer. However, when given a directive that it should not kill it is able to do so, again using non-lethal (if sill crippling) force.

We can take from this that being skilled in killing means that the hero should be less likely to kill. They need to demonstrate a restrain and have an ability to disarm and stop an attacker, rather than just kill them. Going back to John McClane, we can see that being a New York cop in a desperate situation and not a skilled one-man army the killing is an act of survival rather than attack. Morally, McClane is in a different situation.

You then have the satire of the situation. Robocop is programmed to be a skilled one-man army machine. It is demonstrated in the film that he can disarm a perp without killing when the woman is held at gun point. He has pinpoint accuracy. Plus, he is mostly bullet proof, which reduces the threat level. So, when he walks into a dug den and starts wantonly killing everyone in sight I have ask whether this is satire or if Robocop is failing as a hero.

Taking this to the extreme we get to Batman or as Tim Burton would have us see him, Murderman. In the 1989 Batman film he blows up a chemical factory that we have just seen is manned by goons and quite possibly unwitting factory workers. Not to mention the fact that he has just released god know what into the environment to affect anyone living in the area around the factory. Later he opens fire on a parade with a level of accuracy that would make a Storm Trooper proud. Bullets and shrapnel flying everywhere. Don’t tell me people weren’t hurt after that! In Batman Returns (1992) he has taken it to the next level when he just drops sticks of dynamite down some baddies trousers. This is supposed to be the most skilled martial artist in the world yet he can’t resist a bit of killing.

Ok, I know that Batman is more fantasy but the principle stands. If John Rambo and the Terminator can take the moral high ground over you, you’re in trouble. Spiderman has it right, with great power comes great responsibility. If you are skilled killer, then you should be skilled enough not to kill. I really do think that falling back on just killing in action films is a fault of the writers. The best and most interesting heroes are not just machines they know that lives matter.

I’m not saying I want the cheesy white bread characters of the early 20th century. What I am saying is that we have moved past the killing and destruction without consequence of the 80’s and 90’s. In this day and age, it is more important than ever before for the heroes that are being presented to the world to be shown to consider their actions and the consequences they will have.

I am really looking forward to seeing The Shape of Water when it released in Feb in the UK. It’s an original film from a fantastically creative film maker and it looks amazing. I must confess though, I am more excited for The Predator, Deadpool 2 and Avengers: Infinity War.

This year there are more than 30 sequels coming out at the cinema and I am sure that I will watch a good portion of them. Although, the way sequels are treated is funny. Fans and movie goers in general, myself included, lament the lack of original movies coming out but we love to see the on-going adventures of characters we know and love. The trick to making a sequel successful is to make it interesting and fresh while not affecting what has gone before or changing what is at the core of the character.

If we look at a couple of movie series that have multiple sequels we can see where some have succeeded and others have failed, at least in my opinion. Now I am going to discount any series based on books (Harry Potter, Hunger Games etc) as they have a template to work from.

To end on a positive note let’s start with two film series that I mostly enjoy but have followed a very similar path and as a result are at a low point. The Terminator and Alien.

They both start with a small sci-fi horror concept, one a haunted house the other a slasher film. Each gained attention and success by creating a complete world and just dropping the viewer in them. The follow ups take that concept and instead of treading the same ground, up the ante. Aliens and T2 are examples of perfect sequels being great movies in their own right, while building on what was established in the first films. James Cameron being the director and creative force behind each is a testament to his talent.

Unfortunately, after that is where its starts to fall apart. In both cases the third film in the franchise tries to do something new, without really respecting the characters that have been established. Both T3 and Alien 3 have uneven tones and do not feel like extensions of the stories that have already been told. In my opinion Alien 3 is a better film that T3. This could have just been a wobble overall but the issues continue.

The fourth instalments in each series (Terminator: Salvation and Alien: Resurrection) are jumps forward in time and force story telling conceits to keep certain characters in play. Both ignore key elements of the past films in favour of trying to standalone. They are shallow and forced. I would even go as far as to say that both have a negative effect on the films that have come before by taking characters in a poor direction.

In both cases this should have been the end. Profits and credibility were low but there was going to be more. In recent years, we have had Prometheus (and Covenant) and Terminator: Genysis which have both tried to rewrite the history of what has come before. I would suggest that that the result is mostly negative and in some ways insulting to fans of the series.

As I say, both are at a low point now but I am sure we will get some form of movie continuation at some point. The only thing I can hope for is that we get a sequel that is honest to what the heart of the franchise is about.

On the flip side is a series of films that have reinvented themselves to become one of the biggest money makers of recent years. Much like Alien and Terminator the Fast and Furious films start with a small and tight concept. It was nothing new but it was fun did better than expected, it was bound to get a sequel. The following two films try different approaches but always keep the core fun, if daft, elements in play … and fast cars, lots and lots of fast cars. The fourth film in the series is the most interesting for me, it goes back to the beginning but starts to grow the focus of the first three. They move from underground racers being involved in crime to crime stories centred on core characters that happen to be excellent race drivers.

This is taken to the next level in 5, with the addition of Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson. 5 through 8 are crazy crime action movies. They have massive set pieces and explosions, and they took a middling franchise into one of the most successful of the 21st century.

Another example of knowing your franchise but keeping it fresh is the Mission Impossible series. Each film since the first in 1996 has had a different director that has brought a different tone and feel but they have kept the similar sense of fun action and big stunts. Doing so they have gone from strength to strength, with the 6th instalment coming in 2018.

I know that these are very different beasts and that the F&F and MI series is are more pulp action nonsense overall. However, there is something very important that the Terminator and Alien franchise can learn from them. People want to see these characters do what they do. It’s why Bond has 25 films, why Rocky never started MMA, it’s also why people get so frustrated with the Hellraiser franchise (that’s a blog for another day).

As movie goers, we cry out for new and fresh concept and characters and stories. These will always excite and intrigue us. However, let’s be honest, as some studios have shown over the decades, if you put time, effort and money into a well thought out sequel you will satisfy fans and bring in new people as well as make a ton of cash.

As we dance and prance towards Christmas day and the break from work and the usual rat race it provides, I know that many of you will be filling your hours with festive traditions. One of the more modern traditions that has taken hold is the watching of Christmas Movies, usually the same few that tap into family appreciation and nostalgia.

We’re no different in my household, I love Christmas movies. Every year my wife marks the start of the festive season by watching ‘Love Actually’. We watch ‘it’s a wonderful life’, ‘Four Christmases’ and ‘Home Alone’ 1 &2 together at some point in the first few weeks of December. My daughter is starting to find her own favourites in ‘Elf’ and ‘Frosty the Snowman’, which we sit and watch with her.

These are all sweet, fun and fill you with the warmth of happiness and the potential of the season. They are great but they all have a Ying to their Yang. I love the sweet but I love savoury as well, like ‘Gremlins’, ‘Batman Returns’ and

So, to celebrate the season I have created a Christmas Day menu of sweet and Savoury Movie treats.

Ladies and Gentleman, what would you like for Dinner?

~ Starters ~

Option 1: A small bowl of spicy Gremlins, accompanied by fresh A Nightmare Before Christmas

Option 2: A Home Alone melt with a New York style sequel for dipping

~ Main Meal ~

*Option 1: Several large slices of The Santa Clause, with roasted Grinch and a baked Bad Santa

*Option 2: Poached Krampus, with a cheeky portion of A Miracle on 34th street and matured National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation

*both served with generous servings of It’s a wonderful life gravy.

~ Dessert ~

Option 1: A scoop of A Muppets Christmas Carol topped with lashings of Elf

Option 2: A slice of Scrooged drizzled with rich dark Batman Returns

~ Coffee ~

Option 1: A smooth cup of Die Hard with a sprinkling of Jingle all the way

Option 2: A hot pot of The Holiday with a choice of creamy computer generated Christmas Carol or a selection of Four Christmases